From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 6 12:40:25 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03BE6106568B for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:40:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [IPv6:2a01:170:102f::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0558FC20 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:40:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o06Ce7e0050541; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:22 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o06Ce74L050540; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:07 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:40:07 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <201001061240.o06Ce74L050540@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, des@des.no In-Reply-To: X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-arch User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.4-PRERELEASE-20080904 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:40:22 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: File system blocks alignment X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:40:25 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > As for newfs, the defaults are fine as long as the filesystem doesn't > fill up to the point where UFS starts using fragments - but when it > does, you're in trouble anyway, so there's no point in overriding the > defaults unless it makes sense for your data: a filesystem used mostly > to store large files may benefit from increased block / fragment sizes, > but remember to keep the 8:1 ratio. I've created file systems with 1:1 ratio in the past for storing large files (multimedia stuff and similar), and with a very low inode density. So far I haven't encountered any problems. Is there a reason for not using a 1:1 ratio, and should I rebuild my file systems with 1:8 ratio? Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "Clear perl code is better than unclear awk code; but NOTHING comes close to unclear perl code" (taken from comp.lang.awk FAQ)